DT926 




00Ql3=ia732'* 










^^ 

















^ - — 

■ ^^..^^ :Mm^ \/ /Jfe*. ^^..^^ ^^^^^-^ ' 












^^^ 
% 



^^P 



.'h^ 



Digitized by tine Internet Arcinive 
in 2010 witii funding from 
Tine Library of Congress 



littp://www.arcliive.org/details/soutliafricanquesOOpliil 



♦♦♦ X XjLd«** 



APS ia 1900 



SOUTH AFRICAN 
QUESTION 



A Lecture 

On ** The Transvaal 
and Its System of Gov- 
ernment/' with some of 
the abuses of power 
which have led to the 
present "War in South 
Africa. Delivered by 

Thos. Phillips. 




PRICE, 



FIVE CENTS 



THE 

South Af-ricam 
questio/n. 

A LECTU-RE 

3n " The Transvaal and Its System of Government," with 

some of the abuses of power which have led to 

the present War in South Africa. 



Delivered by Mr. THOMAS PHILLIPS 

at the Hall of the Liberal League, and published under 
the auspices of the 

ANGLO-SAXON BROTHERHOOD. 



COPYRIOHTED, 1900. 



Philadelphia, Pa. : 

Press of The Philadelphia Journal 

1007 oakdale street 

1900 

M 

J 



TWO COPIES fiECEiVi^.j 

L Ivf&t-y of CeBgre«% 
Office of th« 

APR 1 3 1900 

SECOND COPY, iieglster of Copyrlglifjfc 



The lecturer begs leave to acknowledge his indebtedness 
in compiling this address to Mr. AUeyne Ireland's article in 
"The Atlantic Monthly" for December, 1899; to Fitzpatrick's 
"Transvaal;" to "Oom Paul's People," by Howard C. Hille- 
gas; to Mr. Thomas G. Sherman's contributions to "The 
New York Times;" and to Mr. James H. Stark's "British 
,*nd Dutch in South Africa." 



V 

."d^'^ 



'U 



K 



T H K "^ 

SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION 



By THOMAS PHILLIPS. 



In trying to place the Boer War in its true light, it is 
necessary to give some historical account of the legal and 
territorial relation the Boers sustain to Britain. The general 
opinion seemingly entertained as to that relation is far from 
according with facts, which, for want of time, I shall state in 
as few words as possible. 

In 1795, during the war between France and Holland, 
Britain seized Cape Colony in the name of Holland. In 
1802, Britain returned the colony to Holland, after peace had 
been restored. In 1806, the war between Fratice and Hol- 
land again broke out. Then, in the name of the Prince of 
Orange, Britain again seized Cape Colony, and held it until 
1814, when she purchased the colony, along with other pos- 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

sessions of Holland, for thirty millions of dollars. Hence, 
Britain was the rightful owner, not only by conquest, but by 
purchase, of the whole of Cape Colony. 

The Transvaal Republic, so called, was founded by 
Boers, who left Cape Colony after that province had been i 
ceded by Holland to Britain. Therefore, the Transvaal Boer ' 
was from the first living in British territory, subject to the 
flag and authority of Britain. 

In 1834, owing to frequent conflicts between the natives 
and colonists, brought about by Boer slave raids, Britain was 
compelled to interfere, and paid the Boers $15,000,000 to 
free their slaves. In 1836 and ^t^j, about eight thousand | 
Boers from Cape Colony settled in what is now known as the I 
Transvaal and Orange Free State. In 1852, the indepen-* 
dence of the Transvaal Boers was recognized ; and the Orange 
Free State was established as an independent republic in 1854. 

In April, 1877, the Transvaal was annexed to the British 
crown. Every member of the Transvaal Council signified in 
writing his willingness to serve the new government, with I 
the exception of Paul Kruger, who, notwithstanding his de- 
dining to sign, drew his salary as a member of the Executive 
Council for eight months after annexation. 

Shepstone, the British representative, was presented 
with numbers of addresses and memorials from Dutch, En- 
glish and natives, praying him to take over the country, 
proving beyond a doubt that the body of the people desired 
to be under British rule. The only opposition consisted of 
Kruger and his friends, who kept up a disturbing agitation 
that led to the revolt of 1880. 

During this agitation, the Boers friendly to Britain 
sought to be assured by the British Government that the 
annexation would not be revoked. This assurance was given 
by the British Government, through Sir Garnet Wolsely, who 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

proclaimed and made krown in the name and on behalf of 
Her Majesty, the Queen, that it was the "will and determina- 
tion of Her Majesty's Government that the Transvaal terri- 
tory shall be and shall continue to be forever an integral por- 
tion of Her Majesty's dominions." 

On another occasion Wolsely said, "so long as the sun 
shines the Transvaal will remain British territory." This 
was confirmed by Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, Secretary of 
State for the Colonies, who directed Sir Garnet Wolsely to 
state from time to time the inability of Her ^M a jesty's Govern- 
ment to entertain any proposal for withdrawal of the Queen's 
sovereignty. All this assurance was given at the request of 
native Boers. 

One voice was raised against this. Gladstone denounced 
the acquisition of the Transvaal, and a month later came into 
power. He received a letter from Messrs. Kruger and Joubert 
praying that he would give effect to his sentiments by 
restoring the independence of the Transvaal. He re- 
plied "that the Queen cannot be advised to relinquish her 
sovereignty over the Transvaal." But on December 13th, 
1880, in the face of this, Kruger and his associates proclaim- 
ed the South African Republic. The Boer war followed, 
which lasted until March, 1881. The British forces were 
defeated in several engagements. Large British reinforce- 
ments were on the way, and the Boers would soon have been 
outnumbered and overmatched, when Gladstone sent out to 
say that if the Boers would lay down their arms they would 
be accorded complete self-government, subject to British 
suzerainty. 

The instrument restoring the Transvaal to the Boers 
was the Pretoria Convention, signed and published on 
August 3d, 1881. 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

The natives in and around the Transvaal, eager to fight 
for the British, were kept back by the British authorities, 
who felt that the general interests of peace in South Africa 
would thus be imperilled. Large numbers of Boers and 
British fought with the regular troops, believing that under 
no circumstances would the Transvaal be given up. The 
position of these friends of Britain after the surrender was 
deplorable. Their grievances were eloquently set forth by 
C. K. White, President of the Committee of Loyal Inhabi- 
tants of the Transvaal, who wrote to Gladstone, but there 
was no reply recorded. 

From the date of the signing of the London Convention 
there accumulated a mass of grievances of British subjects. 
In 1895, a petition praying for redress, signed by thirty-eight 
thousand Uitlanders, was presented to the Volksraad Boer 
Government, and was rejected with insult and ridicule. 
They were told that if they wanted any rights they had bet- 
ter fight for them. 

On December 26, 1895, a manifesto was issued by the 
Transvaal National Union, in which the demands of the 
Uitlanders were stated. The principal demands were: First: 
The establishment of the republic as a true republic; a con- 
stitution framed by the representatives of the whole people. 
Second: An equitable franchise law, and the independence 
of the courts of justice. 

After this came the Jameson Raid. Krnger solemnly 
promised after Jameson's men had laid down their arms that 
he would inquire into and redress their grievances. At 
length a petition signed by 21,648 Uitlanders was forwarded 
by the High Commissioner to Her -Majesty, praying that she 
would intervene to secure just treatment for the Uitlanders, 
who, whilst paying five-sixths of the taxes of the state, had 
no voice in its government. The chief reasons for the peti- 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

tion were stated to be: First: The failure of President Kruger 
to institute the reforms promised after the Jameson Raid. 
Second : The continuation of the dynamite monopoly and its 
attendant grievance, notwithstanding the fact that a govern- 
ment commission, consisting of officials of the republic, had 
inquired into the matter and suggested many reforms. Third: 
The subjugation of the High Court to the executive author- 
ity, and the dismissal of the Chief Justice for his earnest 
protest against the interference with the Court's independ- 
ence. Fourth: The selection of none but burghers to sit on 
juries. Fifth: The aggressive attitude of the police toward 
the Uitlanders. Sixth: Taxation without representation, and 
the withholding of educational privileges from the children 
of Uitlanders. 

There is much could be said, historically, about attempts 
made by the British authorities to secure the recognition of 
the rights of the Uitlanders — all of which failed. It seems 
clear that the real core of the contention between Great 
Britain and the Transvaal Government was the question of 
suzerainty. The convention of 1881 granted complete self- 
government — subject to the suzerainty of Her Majesty — to the 
INHABITANTS of the Transvaal territory, upon certain terms 
and conditions, and subject to certain reservations and limita- 
tions. It is contended that these limitations did not refer to 
the suzerainty, but to the self-government. It was not to be 
unconditional self-government, but self-government with cer- 
tain specified limitations, in addition to the general limitations 
of the Queen's suzerainty. There is no question as to the 
assertion of the suzerainty in the convention of 1881. 

In regard to the convention of 1884: The Transvaal 
delegates requested the British Government to do away with 
the suzerainty by making the proposed convention a Treaty 
between the two Powers. This the British Government 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

refused to do, on the ground that the Transvaal was not in 
fact an independent Power, nor was it intended that it 
should be represented as such. So the issue was definitely 
raised before the convention was signed, and the Transvaal 
delegates signed the convention knowing the position of the 
British Government on the matter. 

Yet, in the face of this, in a dispatch dated May ,9, 1899, 
the State Secretary of the Transvaal Government declares 
that no suzerainty exists. In reply, the British Government 
says, "the contention that the South African Republic is a 
sovereign international state is not, in their opinion, war- 
ranted by law or history, and is wholly inadmissable."- — Dis- 
patch from Chamberlain, dated July 13, 1899. 

The general attempt on the part of the enemies of the 
Anglo-Saxon race, to represent Britain as depriving the 
Transvaal people of the benefits of self-government, and to 
substitute her rule for that of the people of the Transvaal, is 
contrary to historic fact. The origin of Britain's interference 
in the affairs of the Transvaal lies in the fact that everything 
implied in the grant of self-government to the inhabitants 
of the Transvaal has been persistently, insultingly and des- 
potically withheld by a tyrannical oligarchy from the great 
majority of the inhabitants of the Transvaal, in violation of 
all treaties, in contempt of all petitions for justice and in 
defiance of the rightful authority of Britain. 

Britain demands that the men who pay the taxes shall 
have a voice in the government ; that the courts of justice 
shall be independent of the executive power ; that the lives 
and property of the citizens shall be protected ; that a man 
shall be tried by a jury of his peers. For this she is met 
with an ultimatum from the Boer oligarchy demanding — 
First: That all troops on the borders of the Transvaal shall 
be INSTANTLY withdrawn (an impossibility), while at the 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

same time claiming the right to keep her armed forces on 
that same border, which means: "We will keep our forces in 
fighting position on territory which is not ours, and require 
Britain to withdraw her troops from her own territory." 
Second: That all British reinforcements of troops that have 
arrived in South Africa since June i, 1899, be removed from 
the whole of South Africa, and while demanding this they 
retain the right to keep all the reinforcements which, in men 
and oflBcers, they have collected in all parts of the world from 
among the enemies of Britain. Further: "That Her Majesty's 
troops which are now on the high seas shall not be landed in 
any part of South Africa; and that if all this is not com- 
plied with by Wednesay, October 11, 1899, "^^ later than 
five o'clock, p. M., it will be regarded as a declaration of war 
and the Transvaal Government will not hold itself responsi- 
ble for the consequences. Further: "That in the event of any 
further movement of troops occurring within the above- 
mentioned time in a nearer direction to our borders, it, too, 
will be regarded as a declaration of war." 

This ultimatum constituted a declaration of war, which 
left the British people no choice but to meet it. 



CHAPTER II. 

CHARACTER OF BOERS. 

From all that can be drawn from the action of Britain, 
there is nothing that can justify the conduct of the Boers. 
It cannot be successfully denied that the conduct of Britain 
has been that of patient forbearance and consideration for the 
welfare and rights of the people concerned, for which there 
is no parallel in history. Britain's consideration for the peo- 
ple subject to her rule has unfortunately been carried to an 
extent that has placed her empire in peril from which noth- 
ing but the expenditure of enormous treasure, and the heroic 
sacrifices of her sons, can save her. 

The true explanation of the action of the Boers must be 
looked for in the character of the Boers themselves. Their 
history proves them to be tyrannical slave drivers of the 
most ctuel and murderous type; in proof of which I will first 
give an extract from Cyclopaedia of History, published by 
Tiffany & Co., Hartford, Conn., 1847, more than half a cen- 
tury ago : 

"The cruelties practised on the native Africans by the 
Dutch — and that, too, with the sanction of the government — 
almost exceeds belief. When a party of Dutch wished to 
settle in any spot, they proceeded to clear it by putting to 
death the natives with as much coolness as an American 
squatter would exhibit in hewing down the forest trees to 
open a place for the erection of his log house, or in picking 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

off with his rifle a few of the wild animals which threatened 
to be troublesome. The Dutch manner of proceeding was 
summary. Having selected the hut of some poor wretch as 
an object for destruction, they first set fire to it. Let us 
imagine the dismay and horror of a poor family at finding 
flames breaking forth around and above them in every 
direction. Rushing forth, the wretched owners of the mis- 
erable dwelling would implore pity from their cruel enemies. 
The Dutchmen, or Boers, would be too much engaged in 
loading their pieces and discharging them upon the males to 
heed the cries of the females, who, with their children, were 
generally saved. The indifference with which the Boers 
regarded the death of the Bushmen is strikingly illustrated 
in the following anecdote : A Boer, presenting himself at 
the Secretary's office at Cape Town, after having traversed a 
lonely tract, was asked if he had not found the Bushmen 
troublesome; "Not very," replied he, with great coolness, 
"I only shot four." 

When the British Emancipation Act came into force in 
Cape Colony, December i, 1834, the Boers held nearly forty 
thousand slaves, and although Britain paid them fifteen mil- 
lions of dollars for the release of their slaves, they were not 
content, but were still bent on the business of slave-holding. 
Pieter Retief, their leader, stated in his manifesto that the 
abolition of slavery was one of the reasons why his band was 
leaving the colony. 

Notwithstanding an express agreement in the Sand 
River Convention, the Boers persistently practised slavery, 
and made a habit of raiding native kraals for the purpose of 
carrying off women and .children.^ In proof,.! give first from 
British Blue Book, C. 1876, published in 1877, which says, 
"Slavery has occurred, not only here and there in isolated 



THK SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

cases, but as an unbroken practice, it has been one of the 
peculiar institutions of the country. It has been at the root 
of most of the wars." 

Dr. Nachtigal, of the Berlin Missionary Society, wrote 
President Burgers, of the Transvaal, in 1875, "If I am asked 
to say, conscientiously, whether such slavery has existed 
since 1852, and been recognized and permitted by the gov- 
ernment, I must answer in the affirmative." 

A Dutch clergyman, named P. Huet, in a volume pub- 
lished in 1869, entitled "Het Africanische Republick," says, 
"Till their twenty-second year they (the natives) are appren- 
ticed. All this time they have to serve without payment. 
It is slavery in the fullest sense of the word." 

In 1876, one year before the annexation, Khame, Chief 
of the Bagamangwato, sent a petition to Queen Victoria, in 
which he said : "I, Khame, King of the Bagamangwato, 
greet Victoria, the great Queen of the English people. I ask 
Her Majesty to pity me, and to hear what I write quickly. 
The Boers are coming into my country, and I do not like 
them. They sell us and our children. The custom of the 
Boers has always been to cause people to be sold, and to-day 
they are still selling people." 

This testimony is enough to settle this question. They 
are not only slave-drivers, but usurpers and tyrants. When 
independence was granted to the Transvaal, it was on condi- 
tion that there should be an equality of rights between the 
British subjects and Boer burghers. Kruger testified that 
such had been the case, and was emphatic in his assurance 
that there would be no change. He stated explicitly that as 
regarded burgher rights there was to be no difference made 
between British subjects and Boer burghers. That was the 
iinderstanding upo^ whipJi tbe po^jyention was framed mi 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

ratified, and it has been the persistent disregard of that con- 
dition which has led up to the present trouble. 

No sooner had the Boers been placed in control, under 
the convention of 1881, than they began to consolidate the 
oligarchy which they are now fighting to maintain. This is 
proven by the laws they have passed, viz. : 

I — A law of 1882, requiring strangers to have been for 
five years on the field cornets' books, and to have paid a fee 
of $125, before they could vote. 

2 — Again in 1887 a law was passed making a fifteen 
years' residence and registration necessary to citizenship. 

3 — In 1 89 1 a law was passed providing that no alien 
should be admitted to full citizenship except with the con- 
sent of two-thirds of the old burghers residing in the same 
ward with himself. 

4 — Another law was enacted, providing that all stran- 
gers must be furnished with passports ; must have proof of 
their identity, and show that they are able to support them- 
selves, and must also secure from the field cornets "residing 
and traveling certificates," renewable every three months. 

5 — Another law, known as "The Aliens' Expulsion 
Law," empowers the authorities to expel any foreigner from 
the country as a dangerous person, without trial, in the sole 
exercise of their discretion. This legislation proves beyond 
a doubt a settled purpose to keep all power in the hands of 
the oligarchy in control. Again, the foreign settlers in the 
Transvaal were denied all rights to bear arms, while every 
male Boer, from sixteen years and upwards, is heavily armed 
• and drilled at the expense of the foreigners. 

6^By a press law, passed for the avowed object of 
crushing the foreign settlers, all newspapers were placed at 
. the mercy of Pre|ident Kruger, who can suppress t)^em aV 
his pleasurCf 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

7 — By another law, passed for the same purpose, all 
meetings of more than seven persons in the open air are 
absolutely prohibited, while all other meetings can be dis- 
solved in an instant, at the discretion of the police. 

8 — Another law was passed, absolutely prohibiting the 
presentation, by any foreigner, of even so much as a petition 
for redress. 

9 — When Kruger invited foreigners to settle in the 
Transvaal, full naturalization could be obtained within two 
years. After foreigners had accepted his invitation, he re- 
pealed all naturalization laws, absolutely. Then, under pres- 
sure, he restored the laws, but made the term fourteen years; 
but any foreigner desiring naturalization must renounce all 
protection, even from his own government or the Boer Gov- 
ernment, for fourteen years, during which time he would be 
a citizen of no country whatever, and have no rights which 
any Boer would be bound to respect. 

During these fourteen years, he must be ready to serve 
in the Boer army on twelve hours' notice, and he would be 
frequently called to serve, without pay, clothing, or even 
food, which he must provide for himself. At the end of these 
fourteen years of degrading humiliation, he would not be 
allowed to vote for any office worth voting for, unless his 
humble petition was approved by two-thirds of his Boer 
neighbors, by the military chief of his district, and finally, 
by Kruger himself. Neither would he be allowed to vote 
even then unless he was forty years of age. 

In 1844, Kruger was in London, too poor to pay his 
hotel bill, which was paid by a generous Englishman. This 
is when he invited British and Americans to settle in the 
Transvaal, to conduct mining theirey which they did,- and 
built up the country. 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUKSTION. 

Kruger afterwards sold one of his own farms to English- 
men for $500,000, paid in gold. His friends and neighbors 
sold other farms to English, Germans, Frenchmen and 
Americans for many millions of dollars. Every dollar of the 
wealth now possessed by Kruger, his son-in-law, his officials, 
and indeed any part of the Transvaal population, has been 
produced by the settlers. 

The taxes levied annually exceed $20,000,000. Nine- 
tenths of this amount have been collected from the foreign 
settlers, whom Kruger invited into the country. No appre- 
ciable part of these taxes is expended for the benefit of the 
foreign settlers. If this sum were equally divided among all 
the Boers it would furnish an annual income of about $2,000 
for each family, which would pay three times over all their 
living expenses. No such division is made; but half of these 
taxes have been spent in making preparations for war, and 
the other half devoted to the payment of enormous salaries 
to and jobs for Kruger, his sons-in-law, and political sup- 
porters. Kruger himself has annually received $35,000 a 
year salary, while on repeated occasions sums of $15,000 and- 
$25,000 have been paid out of taxes for his direct and exclu- 
sive benefit, as appears by public records. How much more 
has been spent without public record can only be guessed. 

His son-in-law and private secretary possesses (so says 
Mr. Hillegas) a single house costing $250,000 and rolls in 
wealth besides, as he must, to support such a house. 

The official records in a Transvaal law-suit, arising up- 
on a quarrel between two sets of Boer plunderers, show that 
every Boer official worth bribing, including Kruger's son-in- 
law, received bribes from a Boer railroad company. The 
amount of each bribe was set forth in a bill of particulars 
filed in open court. Not one of these men ever denied the 
receipt of these bribes. 



THE SOUTH AF^RICAN QUESTION. 

The foreign settlers, exclusively, built Johannesburg, a 
fine town of some fifty thousand inhabitants. They were 
not merely denied any right to govern that city, they were 
denied any municipal government whatever. This is proven, 
not only by the explicit statements of Mr. Hillegas, the I 
American representative of the Boers, but also by a procla- 
mation of Paul Kruger himself, dated in January, 1896, a 
copy of which is in the possession of Thomas G. Sherman, a 
well-known writer on the Single Tax, in New York City. 
Mr. Hillegas states that not $5.00 could be expended in re- 
pairing a road or bridge without first receiving express 
authority from Pretoria. 

Kruger resisted the introduction of railroads for years, 
in order to compel the miners to hire his private ox-teams at 
enormous prices. When finally he did permit railways to be 
built, he granted the privilege exclusively to persons who 
would agree to give to his relations a big share of the profits. 
He granted monopolies of several indispensable articles of 
supply to the miners, with the result of doubling the price at 
which they could otherwise be obtained. The whole Trans- 
vaal Government was corrupt from top to bottom. No busi- 
ness could be done with them without bribing the President's 
son-in-law and hangers-on. 

Having remonstrated against these things for many years 
in vain, and having received frequent promises of reform 
which were never kept, and were never meant to be, a num- 
ber of foreign residents, including more Americans, in pro- 
portion to their total numbers, than of any other nationality, 
conspired together to compel these reforms to be granted by 
force of arms. They collected rifles, gunpowder, etc., but 
never made any use of them and never committed any overt 
act. Their offences were such as could not have been pun- 
ished in the United States with more than a short term of 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

imprisonment, or fines not exceeding $i,ooo. They neither 
planned nor desired to become a British colony. 

The conspiracy being discovered before the conspirators 
carried it out, sixty of them including six Americans, were 
arrested, cast into an indescribably filthy jail, and informed 
that unless they pleaded guilty they would all be hanged, 
but if they did plead guilty they would be let off with fines. 
Being brought into court, they were charged with an offence 
which, by the express statute law of Boerdom, was punish- 
able with nothing more than a short term of imprisonment. 
Being assured by the Boer prosecuting officer that they 
would receive no greater sentence than this, and would be 
allowed to escape with fines if they pleaded guilty, they 
did so plead, although as to many of them, the offence could 
never have been legally proved. 

No judge then on the bench being quite unscrupulous 
enough to serve Kruger's turn, he imported an utterly 
unscrupulous judge named Gregorawiski. This judge pub- 
licly stated that he came for the express purpose of "making 
it hot for the Uitlanders." After the prisoners had all 
pleaded guilty, this judge announced that, as to the four 
leaders, he would not sentence them under the statute law, 
but would resort to the unwritten law of the Transvaal, 
which prescribed death for such an offence. Accordingly, 
he sentenced these four (one of them was a distinguished 
American, and probably the ablest mining engineer in the 
world), to death, and all the others to various terms of im- 
prisonment and heavy fines. 

Even the Dutch Settlers of South Africa, being horrified 
at this sentence, and pouring, by hundreds, into Pretoria, to 
remonstrate against it, Kruger graciously took the matter 
into consideration, but announced that his religious scruples 
forbade that he should commute the death sentence into fines, 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

because such fines would be "the price of blood," and his 
reverence for his dear Lord Jesus forbade that he should be 
less scrupulous than the priests of Jerusalem. 

The pious Boers, therefore, informed the prisoners that 
they could not be released on the payment of any fines, but 
if the prisoners would of their own accord offer to "subscribe 
to charities" sums ranging from $25,000 to $100,000 each for 
the leading men, and not less than $10,000 for anybody, the 
merciful President might be induced to pardon them without 
any fines or imprisonment. Both the British and American 
Governments being at that time unwilling to interfere, this 
offer had to be accepted. The American citizens all made 
heavy contributions to "charity," Mr. John H. Hammond 
paying $100,000. 

These charitable contributions amounting to about 
$1,000,000 in all, were duly paid over to His Highness Paul 
Kruger, or his son-in-law. It is needless to say that the 
charities have never turned up, although four years have now 
elapsed since the $1,000,000 was safely deposited under the 
control of the pious Paul Kruger. 

Both the British and American Governments meekly 
submitted to these outrages upon their citizens, and, in the 
language of Thomas Sherman, "more shame for them both." 
No wonder that Kruger described both Englishmen and 
Americans as "dogs, who, if they were good would lick his 
boots." 

At last Britain has undertaken to vindicate the rights of 
her citizens, and in so doing, is vindicating the rights of the 
citizens of America, and is entitled to their sympathy and 
gratitude. 

All attempts that are being made to represent Britain's 
quarrel with the Boer3 as one of conquest for the possession of 
mines, etc., is rot of the first water. To begin with, the terri- 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

tory, with its mines, is hers. It is open to investment of the 
world's capital. Britain's investments therein are small com- 
pared with those of France and Germany, but if she wants 
the mines she has the money to buy them. In all this busi- 
ness she opens the door to all nations alike, and asks no 
favors. The question is not one of material interests. The 
question is to-day whether the Boer oligarchy, wiih all its 
despotism and disregard of human rights and liberal consti- 
tutional government, shall drive the British race, with all 
which that race represents, out of South Africa. 

Joseph Chamberlain, having charge of Britain's colonial 
affairs, has proclaimed before the whole world that "Britain is 
fighting for the equal rights of all men on British territory." 

No one can show that Britain is waging war for any 
purpose but in defense of her own flag, which has been 
attacked, and her own territory, which has been invaded, and 
to uphold the equal rights of all the inhabitants. 

An American newspaper says, "Britain's war is a battle 
for enlightenment and civilization, for the extension of law 
and order, stable government that will protect the person and 
prope ty of all classes and conditions alike. Her battle is the 
battle of humanity, of law, of justice, and there can be no end 
of the war until English supremacy shall have been asserted 
and confessed by the Free State and Transvaal Republics. 
There is no intelligent and dispassionate citizen of this 
country who does not confess that wherever the English flag 
and English authority have entered the lines of the barbarian 
civilization has erected a new altar, and its beneficent fruits 
are visible to the whole world." 

But the question as to what Britain is fighting for has 
been well put by Lord Salisbury, as Prime Minister, repre- 
senting the Empire. He has proclaimed that the British 
Government has not received one dollar from South African 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

mines; that the object of the war is to uphold the flag and to 
vindicate the equal rights to self-government of men of every 
race and color; that the government's sole interest was to 
secure good government for the people of South Africa. 

This declaration from the highest representative of the 
British Empire is the most important ever made in history. 
It virtually pledges the greatest empire that ever existed to 
the working out of the democratic principle. It is a magni- 
ficent declaration of radical human rights. It is a proclam- 
ation that the great Anglo-Saxon, or British race,' are, on a 
world-wide scale, the champions of the rights of man, backed 
by the whole force and authority of the British Empire; that 
the rule of aristocracies, popes, and kings, by Divine right, is 
no more, but that the people, the whole people, and nothing 
but the people, under British rule, are supreme. 

This is the issue of the hour. The general hatred hurled 
so fiercely at the British race is the result of tBe exhibition 
of this spirit in their past history. From the earliest times, 
the true Britain has contended for self-government. The 
battle against papal rule proves it; the conflicts against kings 
tell the same story. The old land has driven out and 
dethroned more kings than any other nation on the globe. 
The struggle against Charles the First gave the fatal blow to 
the Divine right of kings. It was that war which opened 
the way and made it possible for the American Republic 
to be established. 

It was men of that race, they who brought Charles to the 
block, and afterwards gave a constitution to William of 
Orange, that on this continent stood out against George the 
Third, that laid the foundations of this republic. It was the 
descendants of the men who fought with Oliver Cromwell, 
that stood and fought for the right at Lexington and Bunker 



THK SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

Hill, and fought on, with the help of French republicans 
until Saxon George was victorious at Yorktown. 

It was in England that the great contest for representa- 
tive government was fought out and established. Every 
parliamentary rule known in legislative bodies originated in 
the British House of Commons. She is known as the mother 
of free commonwealths, and her sons are filling the earth 
with republican institutions. This is why despotic govern- 
ments are ever ready to strike her down. 

This, as the London Times says, "explains the bitterness 
of feeling against her in Germany, the ruling classes being 
Tories of the reign of Charles the Second, if not royalists of 
the reign of Charles the First. They devoutly believe in 
royalty by light Divine, and an hereditary and territorial 
nobility, the support and ornament of the throne. Eiberalism 
in all shapes is abhorrent to them, but of all the forms of 
liberalism, they most cordially detest the system of consti- 
tutional government as developed in this country since the 
beginning of the century They detest it because they fear it. 
It reconciled order and liberty. They have forgiven Russia 
for assisting Napoleon to dismember Prussia, in consideration 
of her devotion to monarchial principles and her resolute 
opposition to popular rights and to constitutional govern- 
ment." 

It is this long fight with all forms of despotism which 
has made the Anglo-Saxon disliked. His championship of 
representative government, of liberty of thought, and freedom 
of trade, has made him a world of enemies. In every field 
of industry, in every workshop and factory, all through 
society, he is singled out as a target at which is hurled the 
poisoned darts of malignant hate on the part of the slaves 
and sworn supporters of political and theological despotism. 
He is surrounded by hordes of enemies bound by solemn 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTION. 

oaths to extirpate him from the earth, they pursue him 
everywhere and strike him in every form, both in the light 
and in the dark; they strive to keep him from all positions 
and rob him of all chance to earn bread. No man is so 
much criticised, insulted, ostracised and outlawed. Un- 
protected and outnumbered, he is turned out of court because 
he is a friend of liberty. 

His success in opening up the world to liberal institu- 
tions has led to war, in which the fate of those institutions 
and the standing of the British race are involved. The forces 
of despotism have been marshalled in battle array against 
Britain, because they know that in the success of Britain's 
soldiers British cannon will sound the death-knell of oligar- 
chic despotism. A world-wide conspiracy, in the spirit of the 
Holy Alliance, which Britain once defeated, is actively 
at work in the hope that in Britain's defeat the forces of 
constitutional liberty may be overthrown. 

In this state of affairs, a Nelsonic call to duty runs 
along the line demanding the formation of an Angi,o-Saxon 
Brotherhood, embracing the whole British race the world 
over, to maintain what their forefathers won, and to meet 
in the spirit of their fathers, this new "Holy Alliance," with 
an overwhelming defeat so effectual that it may never again 
raise its monstrous head, or evermore be kindled into life to 
enslave mankind. 



The An§:lo=Saxon Brotherhood 

fleets at 

SCHUYLER'S HALL, 6th and Diamond Sts. 
Every Sunday at 2 P. M. and Every Thursday Evening at 8 o'clock 

The purposes of this Brotherhood, as announced in its 
Preamble, are the drawing together in closer communion of 
all persons of Anglo-Saxon or British lineage, whether born 
under the protection of the glorious old banner that's "braved 
a thousand years the battle and the breeze," or under the 
bonnie blue flag of Columbia, destined, no doubt, 'ere long to 
share with each other the empire of the seas. 

The Brotherhood requires of candidates for admission 
no declaration of religious beliefs or political affiliations 
other than those covered by its Preamble, and in putting the 
admission fee and the monthly dues at the very modest fig- 
ures of twenty-five and ten cents respectively, enables all 
Anglo-Saxons, irrespective of financial status, to an equal 
share in its benefits and an equal voice in its councils. 

To all of our race we extend a hearty invitation to join, 
and assist in making this Brotherhood what we believe it 
will become, viz., "second to none" in numbers, intelligence 
or influence. 

For the convenience of those residing at a distance we 
are now prepared to organize Branches, and grant subordinate 
Charters, and we earnestly request the members of the Sons 
of St. George, the Caledonian Societies, the American Pro- 
testant Association and all kindred societies, to visit our 
meetings or correspond with the Recording Secretary, who 
will be pleased to furnish any desired information. 

' M ^ -TW ALFRED* D. MORRIS, 

j^^ Wi •'-.p.^ . -^ *iJ^^QfL Recording Secretary.] 

2708 W. Lehigh AveSii^, Philadelphia. 



% 



^ 
^ 



5 J^ • 





«^ •^ 



( 



.<^^' 



0° >:J^% °c 













4^ >:J^L- ^^^ 









^0 






^- 














o V 

^O ''*^^o'* C Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
'it^ " _^ Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 









Treatment Date: June 2003 

PreservationTechnologies 



» ^\^'^j. -• A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

* AV "V*K • 11'' Thomson Park Drive 



^•v 



Cranberry Township, PA 1 6066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 











'^'^o'^ '^^S^^- ^o\>^ °'^^:^^''. ''^^-^ 



V o^ * „ . . 



^v^-V^. 




c 



0' 























■^v.^^ 























